Junk Science At Its Worst | Real Science

I’m so tired of these people lying and cheating – about everything.
...
Tide gauges don’t show any increase after 1993. These idiotic numbers (3.27) come from changing in midstream to an uncalibrated, cherry-picked, manipulated, satellite data set. Call it the CU/NASA nature trick.

Quadrant Online - What's the great hurry?

Translated into plain English, if one really believes in doing something expensive about limiting climate change, there is probably no great reason for doing it now. Adaption to climate change in the future will be just as easy (or as difficult) as would be adaption now. One might as well put off the panic until it becomes observationally obvious that any change in climate resulting from human use of fossil fuels is both significant and detrimental.

Quadrant Online - Investing in failure

The lesson from the Mel Brooks film was that the investors were gullible. They didn’t read the play, they didn’t ask the right questions, they weren’t interested in the details. With the Gillard government moving towards introducing a Carbon Dioxide Tax, it would seem natural to ask if the public, business and the intellectual elite are asking the right questions. And I’m not talking about the ‘science’, but the economics. Is this nation venturing into something that is unproven, something that is pure theory, something of say—the unknown?

If Professor Garnaut can’t say 'with any great precision exactly where the emissions reductions will come from' what on earth are we doing getting involved with carbon dioxide taxes and emissions trading schemes. Have we gone completely bonkers?

Labor's Euro vision provides the smoke and mirrors for a carbon tax | The Australian

In Australia the polls do not support a carbon tax. Like the US, our democracy is vigorous and the public has a history of rejecting elite solutions if they are costly and unpractical, and provided they are opposed by a portion of the mainstream political parties.

It may not be designed for this purpose but the carbon tax is part of a combination of policies that would massively increase the size of the state, bring much greater regulation to economic life, entrench European economic and political norms, and demonstrate a way for voters to be browbeaten into acceptance of a policy they don't like.

The democratic way to win a policy argument is to champion it clearly, argue for it convincingly and win an election. The European way, with its tricks and deceits, is much less attractive, and generally produces much less satisfactory policy.